Toad, thanks for asking that question. I've always felt sorry for plants relegated to the status of False.

Gary

Hi.
I have always atributed the word "false" in a plant description,as to be pretending to be. E.g false acacia, genus Robinia, but pretending to look like Acacia., strange it needs this common name though as it also goes by Honey locust.
Any help? Think i confused myself there as well!!

"False" is not relegated solely to common names. Many binomials carry the Greek prefix "pseudo-" in plant names, which means "false".

I think it is more often a case of one plant being mistaken for something else that is either used similarly or looks similarly. Common names being what they are - essentially folk names assigned by those with no scientific background or really, without any education at all - it would seem pretty easy to encounter a plant one thought was something else just by appearance. And later to discover it was not the same plant at all.

Case in point is blue false indigo, Baptisia australis, which creates a deep blue dye similar to that produced by true indigo, Indigofera tinctoria. They do have a very superficial resemblance and are both members of the Fabaceae so not terrifically out of reach for one to think they are the same plant if not that familiar with plant morphology.

And then there is always the option of the original namer knowing them not to be the same plant but calling them the same common name anyway. Lack of imagination??

btw decoguy, some plants have multiple common names - as many as dozen or so English common names and a corresponding one or two or more in various other languages. Thank goodness for the latin binomials or we'd never know exactly what anyone was talking about!

To me 'false' just means that something looks like something else. There may be a utilitarian purpose for using such names. For example if there were a plant with medicinal value it would be useful to know that there was a look-alike. Morel fungi are edible but many 'false' morels are toxic to some people.

I think of it as meaning that the plants are often mistaken for one another, which usually but not always implies they bloom at about the same time or have some other resemblance to each other that leads people to confuse the two.

But this can easily get confusing itself -- look at False Spirea, which can refer to either Astilbe, an herbaceous perennial, or Sorbaria sorbifolia, a shrub.

Botanical names change so often that sometimes the common names are the ones that anchor a plant in memory. If you know a plant has a "false" analogue, it alerts you to be extra diligent in identifying the "real" plant.

Common names, so much color and so much confusion. Just take "nettle." How many plants have nettle in their name - including even the "false" moniker? Too many. The botanical names, regardless of how they have been changing, are the only way we can talk about plants and know if we are referring to the same plant. This is doubly true for herbalists who cannot afford the confusion of common names.

Even so, I love common names....."john-go-to-bed-by-noon," "ragged sailors," "piss-a-bed," etc..... How can you not love them?

"False" does say to me that the plant shares characteristics with the "real" (haha!) plant.

FataMorgana

Thank you all for your responses! I think I have my answer(s). I get the sense that there aren't books, articles, or websites that go deeply into this particular question. While using "false" to alert herbalists to dangers in similar-looking plants (thank you lycopus), there are so many others that don't fit that criteria (and others that probably would benefit from having "false" attached to a common name). Hopefully someday, a botanical folklorist/taxonomist will provide more answers.